Santa Rosa, CA
reply to hottboiinnc
said by hottboiinnc:The copper can't just "go away". The FCC would need to rule that there was adequate competition, which in two recent proceedings they declined to do.
And the FCC says that the privilege goes away. Just because you pay now doesn't mean you'll pay later. Meaning it goes away.
To further bolster competition, the state of CA passed AB 1315 last year, which states in part that:
This bill would provide that if an incumbent local exchangeSee the full text here: »ftp://leginfo.public.ca.gov/pub/09-10/···red.html
carrier files a forbearance petition with the FCC requesting that the
FCC forbear from enforcing that carrier's duty to provide to any
requesting telecommunications carrier nondiscriminatory access to
network elements on an unbundled basis at any technically feasible
point on rates, terms, and conditions that are just, reasonable, and
nondiscriminatory, within any metropolitan statistical area located
in the state, the PUC would be required to participate in that
forbearance proceeding by filing comments on the petition, providing
data on competition in the metropolitan statistical area that is the
subject of the petition, and taking any other action that advances
the state's policies promoting competition in telecommunications
In any case, I'm not real worried about the copper disappearing, that's simply FUD at this point.
San Francisco, CA
Thanks Dane for the clarification.
I also am not too worried about copper disappearing anytime soon, especially with the headline on DSLReports about AT&T discontinuing U-verse build out.
If AT&T did try such a move, I would definitely be speaking to the California Public Utilities Commission in support of continued competition in the marketplace.